Jump to content

[OB] Underwhelming


IronBars

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, IronBars said:

Anyway point is he said it for SA not the cosmere like you implied

I guess I thought you'd meant it differently than you did then. 

That quote says that there should be a complete arc within the book itself, and that he plots each SA book like a trilogy. Which is all there. 

Book 1 as a complete arc to itself in Urithiru/the Parsh. 

Book 2 and 3 as an arc in the Kholinar sequence. 

Book 3 and 4 as an arc through Shadesmar and Thaylenah.

But it's still interconnected with the other volumes.

I guess like so much else, I interpret those words differently than you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Bort said:

No, I don't think we are. Certainly that's not the impression I got from reading Oathbringer. As WoB said, it is more like she took a step in the right direction, but still has a ways to go yet.

After a lot of discussion on this board, I agree, and the WoB does make it clear that Shallan still has a long way to go which makes me feel better. Her step in the right direction just seemed so small to me, and yet I get the impression that Shallan at least thinks she is way better. 

Just going off my overall impression the first read through, I remember feeling like 1. Hmmm, Shallan’s got some serious issues she is avoiding, 2. Yikes, she is really not okay, 3. Scared that she seems to be getting worse, 4. What?! She is supposed to be better all of a sudden and happily getting married?! 

So maybe we weren’t meant to see it that way and it makes more sense that Shallan is such an unreliable narrator that we can’t trust her own assessment of herself. But it definitely did color my first impression. Only half way through a reread but I’m thinking my reaction may be a little different this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dreamstorm said:

In this respect, OB to me was a mixed bag.  Dalinar got a very nice, complete character arc.  Shallan had a lot of development (not growth, but expanding her character), but there wasn't a conclusion to her arc in the book; that's definitely a story arrested in development at the moment.  Kaladin is much the same as Shallan.  (They are almost always mirroring each other in this series.)  We had some nice minor character arcs, including Venli and Timbre, Skar becoming Radiant and the reveal of Renarin's void-ish spren.  But mostly it was Dalinar, and if you weren't into that arc, I can definitely see how the book would fall flat. 

I didn't mind Dalinars flash back sequence, my only issue with it as i said before is to me, it revealed the dalinar we new as a lie/fake/sham whichever word best describes him.

Reason being he would never of been that person without his memories etc being taken away, also how he spent months (years?) being unable to deal with it until said memories etc were taken and then to suddenly be able to accept them in a matter of days (weeks) seemed a little cheap so to speak.

Added to that the whole Szeth swearing his 3rd ideal to him making no sense and it was all a little suspect in my opinion.

2 hours ago, Calderis said:

I guess I thought you'd meant it differently than you did then. 

That quote says that there should be a complete arc within the book itself, and that he plots each SA book like a trilogy. Which is all there. 

Book 1 as a complete arc to itself in Urithiru/the Parsh. 

Book 2 and 3 as an arc in the Kholinar sequence. 

Book 3 and 4 as an arc through Shadesmar and Thaylenah.

But it's still interconnected with the other volumes.

I guess like so much else, I interpret those words differently than you. 

What he said isnt open to interpretation really, so i dont see how you can try justify it like that.

He said it had to be able to stand alone and it cant, he failed to do the exact thing he said he wouldn't do due to learning from other authors, im not sure how you can dispute that.

Edited by IronBars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@IronBars because, as I thought was abundantly clear by this point, I liked the book and think it does stand on its own.

I can absolutely dispute that, because it's an opinion, not a fact. 

Edit: I didn't mean that to sound as harsh as it did, but I mean...you can't tell me that it's impossible to dispute something that is based on a subjective outcome. The fact that we feel differently makes either of our opinions just that. 

Edited by Calderis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked Oathbringer too, overall. I think it's still magnificent, despite all the noise I make about how I disliked parts of it. But as a fan it's very easy to get bogged down in that kind of a negative tunnel vision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Calderis said:

@IronBars because, as I thought was abundantly clear by this point, I liked the book and think it does stand on its own.

I can absolutely dispute that, because it's an opinion, not a fact. 

Edit: I didn't mean that to sound as harsh as it did, but I mean...you can't tell me that it's impossible to dispute something that is based on a subjective outcome. The fact that we feel differently makes either of our opinions just that. 

It didnt sound harsh, but how it comes across is you shift your arguement, first your arguement was he never said that about SA, it was the cosmere and tried imply i thought random things from other of his works would happen.

Then shifted to how it is a complete stand alone volume.

I dont mean this in an offensive way so dont take it that way, and im sorry if anyone takes it badly but i don't know another wording of this to use - but you seem like the biggest fanboy ever.

Every post in this thread iv seen from you is jusfifying why sanderson was right to do this or that and you don't seem to have any arguments against what i or others say besides justfying what actually was in OB.

At least thats the impression i get.

Again apologies if it gives offence its probably poor wording on my part but its how it at lesst seems to be.

Again sorry.

@Vissy i said at the very start OB was an ok book, just not good/great, to me personally it just has alot of shortcomings, 

Edited by IronBars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, IronBars said:

It didnt sound harsh, but how it comes across is you shift your arguement, first your arguement was he never said that about SA, it was the cosmere and tried imply i thought random things from other of his works would happen.

Then shifted to how it is a complete stand alone volume.

I dont mean this in an offensive way so dont take it that way, and im sorry if anyone takes it badly but i don't know another wording of this to use - but you seem like the biggest fanboy ever.

Every post in this thread iv seen from you is jusfifying why sanderson was right to do this or that and you don't seem to have any arguments against what i or others say besides justfying what actually was in OB.

At least thats the impression i get.

Again apologies if it gives offence its probably poor wording on my part but its how it at lesst seems to be.

Again sorry.

@Vissy i said at the very start OB was an ok book, just not good/great, to me personally it just has alot of shortcomings, 

And it's fine if he liked it, and it's fine if you didn't. This thread is not productive if we are going devolve into just calling who's a fanboy or not. (I mean, to be clear, probably a lot of us generally really enjoy Brandon's books here.)

It's fine if you didn't like the book but Calderis can also say why he liked it and try to divine why Brandon chose to do what he did.

We aren't going to devolve into a thread where people are called fanboys (as if that's bad) or saying that someone who doesn't like the book is bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Chaos said:

And it's fine if he liked it, and it's fine if you didn't. This thread is not productive if we are going devolve into just calling who's a fanboy or not. (I mean, to be clear, probably a lot of us generally really enjoy Brandon's books here.)

It's fine if you didn't like the book but Calderis can also say why he liked it and try to divine why Brandon chose to do what he did.

We aren't going to devolve into a thread where people are called fanboys (as if that's bad) or saying that someone who doesn't like the book is bad.

My point wasnt the fanboy thing, it was the fact all he does it cut under peoples opinions by justifying the choices of the author, which isnt actually a valid point against anyone who says something not in praise of OB thats just my opinion though.

I did apologise several times so my intent wasnt to cause an arguement or any such 

I do enjoy most of brandons books by the way, just some act like he is infallible and just defend what happened within OB rather then have there own actual opinion.

Edited by IronBars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, IronBars said:

My point wasnt the fanboy thing, it was the fact all he does it cut under peoples opinions by justifying the choices of the author, which isnt actually a valid point against anyone who says something not in praise of OB thats just my opinion though.

I did apologise several times so my intent wasnt to cause an arguement or any such 

I do enjoy most of brandons books by the way, just some act like he is infallible and just defend what happened within OB rather then have there own actual opinion.

Or maybe we're "defending" what happened in OB because we have our own opinion, which is that we liked it, and we're explaining WHY we liked it?

I know that I have my own beefs with Oathbringer.  And I know that Calderis and many others do too.  But many of the things you see as underwhelming or as problems, many people think have good reasons for, and enjoyed. 

That's the point people are trying to make.

 

For example:  Did I find Shallan's chapters enjoyable?  Sometimes yes, often no.  Did I find them well written, insightful, and realistic?  Absolutely.

Edited by RShara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, RShara said:

Or maybe we're "defending" what happened in OB because we have our own opinion, which is that we liked it, and we're explaining WHY we liked it?

I know that I have my own beefs with Oathbringer.  And I know that Calderis and many others do too.  But many of the things you see as underwhelming or as problems, many people think have good reasons for, and enjoyed. 

That's the point people are trying to make.

 

For example:  Did I find Shallan's chapters enjoyable?  Sometimes yes, often no.  Did I find them well written, insightful, and realistic?  Absolutely.

See this is exactly what i mean, you made my point peferctly.

You do the same as Calderas alot as well.

Ye cut under someones point with a throw away comment defending what the author did, with out any actual arguement to back it up, then vanish, until ye see something else ye take exception to and repeat the process.

Ye seem popular on here, but ye're opinions aren't any more valid then mine or anyone elses.

If comment then back up your comment dont just randomly appear cut under someones opinion and vanish til do the same again.

If i could get downvotes for a post id prob have 50 for this but its how it seems to me and im sure others as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IronBars said:

See this is exactly what i mean, you made my point peferctly.

You do the same as Calderas alot as well.

Ye cut under someones point with a throw away comment defending what the author did, with out any actual arguement to back it up, then vanish, until ye see something else ye take exception to and repeat the process.

Ye seem popular on here, but ye're opinions aren't any more valid then mine or anyone elses.

If comment then back up your comment dont just randomly appear cut under someones opinion and vanish til do the same again.

If i could get downvotes for a post id prob have 50 for this but its how it seems to me and im sure others as well.

I mean... If you didn't like Dalinar's arc, does that require justification? No, that's just how you reacted. If you did like Dalinar's arc, then that's your opinion. Informed or not that's the reaction.

Them being Arcanists don't make a difference, you're right, in justing which opinion is "right".

Please do report posts that you feel undercut an opinion with no justification. 

Like, I'm sorry, are you suggesting that someone thinking Oathbringer standing on its own and you disagreeing means that they are unjustified in their opinion? It's an opinion. You can explain your opinion but it's an opinion. Please do feel free to share with me specific posts where you think they are out of line and I'll discuss with the staff. 

It's possible this discussion thread really just isn't productive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I absolutely have my own issues with OB. As mentioned earlier in this thread I think the pacing was off. I detest the suddenness of Moash's turn to the Fused cause. I understand the motivation for Amaram's turn, but think the lack of it being shown makes the character into a cartoon villain. 

I'm not attempting to change anyone's mind. That's absolutely pointless. Opinions aren't backed by evidence or arguments. Their feelings, and feelings only get stronger when attacked. 

And I am absolutely a fanboy. I live on this site and the Discord. I have over 5000 posts in about a year of activity. I eat, drink and breath the Cosmere. I have no shame in that fact. 

The point of this thread is discussion, and discussing why things that other people thought fell flat, and why they did work for me is entertaining. My enjoyment doesn't negate someone else's lack thereof. 

I may not be commiserating with those of you who feel differently than me, but I'm by no means attacking anyone.

Edit: and due to connection issues I didn't see Chaos' post. So I'll take heed and be done with the thread. 

Edited by Calderis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Opinions without arguments are still opinions... I don't know,  OB isn't the greatest book Brandon wrote and I really get your complaints.  Others just explain why those things don't bother them. 

Popular or not, nobody is obligated to explain themselves if they don't agree with something. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Chaos

By cut under all i meant was, shouldnt make throw away coments without a willingness to at least back up your reasons, thoughts, feelings etc, otherwise it comes across like as i mentioned earlier that just justifying the authors choices because hes your favourite author. 

No one was being mean/nasty or any other such.

@Mestiv

I understand what your saying but in my opinion, i don't know maybe im old school, but if a person isnt willing to discuss things fully, back up there viewpoint etc then they shouldnt comment because at the end of the day a forum is for a discussion of whatever that forum is about, so making throw away comments kind of misses the point.

Expecting someone to explain/justify why they are saying what they are saying is more of a given i would of thought.

Since calderis and rshara "left the thread" be pointless to reply to there posts.

Edited by IronBars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IronBars said:

@Chaos

By cut under all i meant was, shouldnt make throw away coments without a willingness to at least back up your reasons, thoughts, feelings etc, otherwise it comes across like as i mentioned earlier that just justifying the authors choices because hes your favourite author. 

No one was being mean/nasty or any other such.

@Mestiv

I understand what your saying but in my opinion, i don't knoe maybe im old school, but if a person isnt willing to discuss things fully, back up there viewpoint etc then they shouldnt comment because at the end of the day a forum is for a discussion of whatever that forum is about, so making throw away comments kind of misses the point.

Expecting someone to explain/justify why they are saying what they are saying is more of a given i would of thought.

Since calderis and rshara "left the thread" be pointless to reply to there posts.

Alternatively, I would ask you to look at your original posts and see that you actually just stated opinions, just as Calderis and RShara did. You did kind of say why, but if you really look at your OP, where you say things like "the reason for Dalinar seeing the Nightwatcher was pathetic" is 100% an opinion which you really didn't justify at all. 

I'm just saying that you claiming to want very justified posts when you are just stating your own thoughts is, quite frankly, an astonishing lack of introspection. In later posts you do justify things, but so do others. Look at the pot before calling the kettle black, thank you very much.

If you read many of RShara and Calderis's posts they say similar things, but in other scenarios they even say they think Oathbringer is not perfect, so you claiming--with absolutely no justification--that they think everything Brandon is perfect is false.

I think people have been very respectful of your opinion--even if they disagree--and you'll need to actually live with the fact that others don't need to agree with that. The burden of proof isn't suddenly on the opposition because you don't like their opinions. From the other perspective your opinions probably seem equally unjustified.

Again, use the report feature and staff will determine whether there is toxic behavior or poor discourse occurring. We have a very active staff chat with many different perspectives and people involved and we make group decisions on matters. Click the Flag on the post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Chaos said:

Alternatively, I would ask you to look at your original posts and see that you actually just stated opinions, just as Calderis and RShara did. You did kind of say why, but if you really look at your OP, where you say things like "the reason for Dalinar seeing the Nightwatcher was pathetic" is 100% an opinion which you really didn't justify at all. 

I'm just saying that you claiming to want very justified posts when you are just stating your own thoughts is, quite frankly, an astonishing lack of introspection. In later posts you do justify things, but so do others. Look at the pot before calling the kettle black, thank you very much.

If you read many of RShara and Calderis's posts they say similar things, but in other scenarios they even say they think Oathbringer is not perfect, so you claiming--with absolutely no justification--that they think everything Brandon is perfect is false.

I think people have been very respectful of your opinion--even if they disagree--and you'll need to actually live with the fact that others don't need to agree with that. The burden of proof isn't suddenly on the opposition because you don't like their opinions. From the other perspective your opinions probably seem equally unjustified.

Again, use the report feature and staff will determine whether there is toxic behavior or poor discourse occurring. We have a very active staff chat with many different perspectives and people involved and we make group decisions on matters. Click the Flag on the post.

The original post yes was a statement of opinion as you said without alot of justification, you are right, and yes i backed each one up throughout the post, why didnt i justify that opinion you mentioned specifically ? No one asked me to, 

I didnt just vanish and not justify my thoughts on it, so thats not the same as what i said atal

If you read my post again i said " shouldnt make throw away coments without a willingness to at least back up your reasons, thoughts, feelings etc" which i at no point did, 

I don't care if someone doesnt agree with my opinion in the slightest, if you notice everything i say is ended with in my opinion, to me it seems, imo or some variation of that, because its just an opinion and i make that clear.

For some reason what i said seems to of made you become very defensive, im not really sure why, but mayhaps its best to end the discussion there because i said something to caldris and stated why, and it wasnt even something bad yet people seem to of been upset by it.

Edited by IronBars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know some people think I'm trying to defend Calderis and RShara when I've called them out for them being abrasive multiple times before historically. 

I simply am annoyed that there appears to be a dramatic double standard when you both are literally doing the same thing, which I'd do for absolutely anyone.

I can only surmise that some would leave the thread because they don't wish to create conflict when things are heating up. I don't think that's a bad thing. That's exactly what people should do, because we are all friends here and if anyone gets heated, we can step away, have some tea, and come back later and realize that that argument wasn't very important in the grand scheme of things.

I'd encourage you to continue to be here and you are definitely entitled to your opinions. I don't intend to close this topic unless you want it to be. But I'd ask everyone, as I had prior in this thread, to be cognizant of what are opinions and what are facts, not name call, and know that everyone else here is a reasonable human. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, digitalbusker said:

This phrasing is a little misleading, but when Brandon talks about writing (I'm mostly thinking about Writing Excuses here, but I know some of his BYU lectures are online and I expect he uses similar vocabulary there) he talks a lot about being aware of "what promises are you making to the reader" and the importance of fulfilling those promises in a way that's satisfying but not necessarily what the reader expects. There's a significant overlap between Sharders and Writing Excuses listeners, so I expect that's how the term came to be used that way here.

Fair enough. But I think the word 'promise' in this context isn't helpful even if Brandon uses it. I'd say it's more like 'a plot item was raised and then went unresolved.' I would agree an author shouldn't do that. But I don't think we can say authoritatively this is the case.

For instance, I personally was greatly looking forward to radiant Jasnah becoming Cosmere-aware after walking a week with Wit, and I wanted to hear something, anything about that in Oathbringer. This was one of the items mentioned in galendo's post that led to mine. So you might think I agree on that point, but instead of disappointment I suffer only from heightened anticipation. I know she learned things. I bet they will heavily impact the future of the series and maybe the Cosmere. Am I mad that Brandon didn't show Wit spilling all (or more likely, what he chose to share)? Am I mad Brandon didn't have Jasnah share everything with her compatriots? No. I'm wondering what the heck did she learn that was so whacked that she's keeping it from the others?

It's a long series. I don't expect everything raised to be neatly resolved in the next volume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

21 hours ago, digitalbusker said:

This phrasing is a little misleading, but when Brandon talks about writing (I'm mostly thinking about Writing Excuses here, but I know some of his BYU lectures are online and I expect he uses similar vocabulary there) he talks a lot about being aware of "what promises are you making to the reader" and the importance of fulfilling those promises in a way that's satisfying but not necessarily what the reader expects. There's a significant overlap between Sharders and Writing Excuses listeners, so I expect that's how the term came to be used that way here.

The big "problem" I have with OB that no grand expectation is set or promise made for the last few hundred pages or so.

 In WoK we had Dalinar vs Sadeas and the situation of Bridge Four and indeed these issues were met by the end of WoK. In WoR the even greater expectation was resolved that the war against the Parshendi would end which we had expected since the beginning of WoK. 

OB is different. The big villain is Odium but we also know that he is not going to be defeated in this book. There is no plan how to challange him, no ring to throw into Mt. Doom, no Death Star to destroy, no Horcruxes to kill, you get the point. All plotlines hang in a void without some big expectation to tie them all together. Instead the characters stumble along for the last act to arrive. I mean they literally stumble through the Perpendicularity into Thaylen! We could not have expected the books resolution there with the minor villain Amaram, which we have barely seen in the book. This lack of a bigger expectation makes for a somewhat confusing read. This does not make OB a bad book, just an unusual one. I did not like it as much as WoR but it is still damnation good.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Diomedes said:

 

The big "problem" I have with OB that no grand expectation is set or promise made for the last few hundred pages or so.

 In WoK we had Dalinar vs Sadeas and the situation of Bridge Four and indeed these issues were met by the end of WoK. In WoR the even greater expectation was resolved that the war against the Parshendi would end which we had expected since the beginning of WoK. 

OB is different. The big villain is Odium but we also know that he is not going to be defeated in this book. There is no plan how to challange him, no ring to throw into Mt. Doom, no Death Star to destroy, no Horcruxes to kill, you get the point. All plotlines hang in a void without some big expectation to tie them all together. Instead the characters stumble along for the last act to arrive. I mean they literally stumble through the Perpendicularity into Thaylen! We could not have expected the books resolution there with the minor villain Amaram, which we have barely seen in the book. This lack of a bigger expectation makes for a somewhat confusing read. This does not make OB a bad book, just an unusual one. I did not like it as much as WoR but it is still damnation good.  

 

I think that's a very compelling astute explanation as to why a lot would dislike the structure of OB. Well put. 

I do think Amaram's lack of presence in the book made that eventual confrontation much weaker, unlike Sadeas in book one where that relationship was explored a lot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, IronBars said:

but how it comes across is you shift your argument, first your argument was he never said that about SA, it was the Cosmere and tried imply i thought random things from other of his works would happen. Then shifted to how it is a complete stand alone volume.

Reading the conversation, Calderis did say "I guess I thought you'd meant it differently than you did then" before changing what he was saying. I'd consider that more as a misunderstanding than a flip-flopping argument, which it kinda sounded like you were implying. If that was unintentional, then I misread, but that's how it looks.

4 hours ago, RShara said:

I was actually trying very hard to be fair and non-confrontational.  Apparently, I suck at it.

I completely agree with Chaos here. Take a break here and there to let your head cool. Check out a different sub-forum for a minute to distract you. If need be, wait it out and let the conversations shift before resuming. Works wonders for me.


Ok. This is the third time you've said this in the thread, so I may as well tackle all three at once.

On 2/19/2018 at 11:42 AM, IronBars said:

People don't agree its fine, but people just don't seem to agree just because its Sanderson which is wrong, hes your favorite author - great - that doesn't mean everything he touches is gold.

On 2/19/2018 at 3:00 PM, IronBars said:

I was a member of this site a long time ago, i recall why i left now, say something against the praise Sanderson mantra and basically get attacked and insulted, 

14 hours ago, IronBars said:

Most arguments for how perfect OB is just seem to want to justify and applaud every choice, decision, Sanderson himself made just because it is Sanderson.

As someone who just spent 40 minutes rereading the entire thread(stopwatch, if it matters), these ring as rather hollow accusations. For easy reference, the quoted snippets from you above are from Pages 2, 4, and 9 respectively. There are only really 3 instances of comments that are wholly positive towards Oathbringer: a short statement by wotbibliophile on page 6, a long piece by hoiditthroughthegrapevine on page 7, and a short comment by Drake Marshall on page 8.

Everyone else has made criticisms, and as such, do not fall under your third statement. The mentioned instances of these "oh he's great" posts(as you appear to see them) are several pages after the first statement of yours, making it not hold water here either. There is nothing in the first two pages that implied people thought everything Sanderson touches is gold(as you put it). I can't speak to the "back then" in your second statement, but I haven't read anything that should remind you of something like what you imply.

The only other person in this thread who has not made their opinion on Oathbringer known is myself because, as I have already stated, I have not read the book.

On 2/19/2018 at 3:00 PM, IronBars said:

If you noticed, all I've done is share my opinion on it, anyone who said they loved the book I said that was fine, it was great etc that they did, I just said why I didn't. Personally I found people to be trying to change my opinion on it rather then listening to why I felt how I did and justify the authors choices rather than have an actual opinion of there own.

As I've noted above, everybody but me has made an opinion of their own in this thread. Saying that people who are sharing their opinion aren't making an opinion of their own is illogical. You've stated your opinions on things that you disliked within the book. Others have shared their opinions on those things, some agreed with you, others didn't.

But you've used phrases like "such and such thing didn't make sense." So in response, you should be expecting people to try and justify the author's choice in doing it, to try and explain why they thought it did make sense. You are essentially criticizing people for trying to debate the subject you've brought up, when we are on a discussion forum. Debate is the point.

Additionally, someone else explaining their opinion is not necessarily trying to invalidate your opinion. It's just the spirit of debating, since life would be boring if we all agreed on everything.

(If this came off as rude, it was not intentional. It's been a long day)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The One Who Connects said:

I completely agree with Chaos here. Take a break here and there to let your head cool. Check out a different sub-forum for a minute to distract you. If need be, wait it out and let the conversations shift before resuming. Works wonders for me.

I wasn't hot tempered until the last few pages.  When you read back, you can see I was mostly saying that everyone was entitled to their opinions, agree or not, and to make sure to stay civil.  Which is why I'm so baffled at these accusations being thrown at me *shrug*. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to let everyone know that I have moved @Dreamstorm post and my response to it into separate thread, where I hope we can find some common ground about moderation politics of the 17th Shard.

Feel free to go there if you have something to say on that subject, but otherwise let's allow IronBars' topic to get back on track.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...